Tanmart22 wrote:your mind and heart are one cohesive unit. And becoming better acquainted with this state was sort of the point of me starting this thread, but maybe I am asking the wrong crowd. Maybe it is more along the lines of spirituality or humanity, all though to me these are core pillars of Buddhism.

Btw, Buddhism acknowledges no distinction between heart in the sense of feeling and mind in the sense of intellect. {Buddhism's traditional claim that mind is 'seated' in the heart may still be supported via the subtle-body/ch'i physiology of classical Indian/Chinese medicine; there are ample references for this.} Maybe you originally ingested the heart-v.-mind paradigm from romantic fiction or feminist literature rather than 'New Age', although I can see that a full immersion in western popular culture is enough to make anyone struggle to see things through any other lens. However:

viniketa wrote:there is very much a "bridge" between heart and mind, it exists whether we "work on it" or not, but working on it is one approach to meditation. It is very important in the practice of yoga

You also made a lot of claims about heart rate which Buddhism doesn't normally concern itself with, but I'd be interested to hear proof that it really is slower when we're bored or depressed than it is when we're dreaming, as you claimed it is

I didn't understand what you also said about 'the visual parts of your mind' - I was under the impression that our species' over-reliance on this this sense was a problem, and a lot of my 'spiritual path'/getting-my-head-together has supported that theory both before and after the event, even when visual sensations were tied to feelings {Actually, they used to bury feelings inside them - Not good.} Also, the electricity that scientists have confirmed as fundamental to the mind-brain complex vanishes at death, and Tibetan/Vajrayana Buddhism specifically teaches that only a 'subtle continuum' of mind survives that event. Again, you've clearly heard or read certain teachings elsewhere and now take them for granted. Maybe 'the flow of electricity' is stabilised by meditation (I would imagine the pulse is normally stabilised at any rate), but this isn't Buddhist meditation's goal, and I've certainly never heard that we should grow to understand what such changes may or may not do to our bodies. If successful, I understand that Buddhist meditation will bring about a 'more engaged state', but Buddhist practice aims higher than merely tweaking at existing patterns; I will leave this to those better-qualified than myself to explain.

Tanmart22 wrote:an accurate perception of nothing can make the nothing that much more unbearable.

That's one that's kept me and many other 'newbies' occupied for many years of our 'spiritual' lives, but if you do choose the Buddhist path you should eventually understand that its vision of reality -sunyata/'emptiness'- is in many ways the opposite of the solid, real 'nothingness' that you address and which most westerners take to be a 'backdrop' - both to ourselves and to matter.:

{I'm still at the 'understanding' stage and not quite the 'experiencing' stage, by the way.}

Tanmart22 wrote:So in a sense I am left with an empty mind, but for me this is not a desirable state.

I'm way off from emptying my mind of cognitions in meditation - If that's what you meant, then more power to you, but bear in mind that -again- this isn't the final goal, although I understand it can be useful for a while - if only to make room for new insight, unearthed compassion, and so on. No-one said meditation was 'useful' or 'engaging', but on the other hand, since it's far from being an end in itself, the outcome will be a positive pattern of results which appears to build on itself. After a while, we're supposed to give up our expectations of meditation and its results, but those results should only become clearer and deeper. I gather one has to go pretty 'wrong' to get a genuinely negative or even zero result - For example, at the age of 8, I developed the unusual conviction -which I'm still finding it hard to shake off- that I was a 'strand of consciousness'; I suspect that this -along with my (associated?) autism- is a sign that spiritual practice in my last (or a recent) rebirth came somewhat unhinged. {Although the Yogachara school of Buddhist philosophy appears at first sight to assert something similar to my 'conviction', like all Orthodox Buddhist schools it accepts the 'three seals' of Buddhist teaching - impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, and no findable I.}

Back to your OP, a major task of Buddhist meditation from day 1 -as traditionally explained (albeit in my own words )- is to clearly register whatever happens in your mind, this awareness being typically extended to objects of normally-subliminal awareness like the breath -or even to simple objects of full awareness like a stone- in order to calm the mind enough for meditation (as opposed to rumination) to take place and for progress to be made. It helps if you can see your own mind as 'interesting, or _ _ comfortable', accept it, and make it feel 'wanted [and] needed', even if only in as much as you trust the Buddhist teaching that the end of suffering lies through it.

Tanmart22 wrote:what I am asking is pretty straightforward

I'm not sure dharma queries can be, atleast when they're in English - famously the language of cut-and-dried practicality, in which the few words with any potentially spiritual uses, such as 'consciousness', don't even have standard definitions yet

"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}

Hello friend- I appreciate you taking the time to write so much, I enjoyed reading it and will read again no doubt to further digest your many good points.

I would point out, however, that you, along with others who've replied here are under the impression that I am making a lot of assumptions and coming from a certain school of thought and brining teachings to the table, etc...

While it is impossible to divorce the seeker from his life experience entirely, much of the information I conveyed in both my original and follow up posts does not come from any assumption or school of thought. It comes directly from me observing my physical, neurological, and spiritual states, monitoring the activity of my mind and the beat of my heart, trying to draw connections without really relying on any established academic or philosophical doctrine.

So, I would caution you that before you start explaining how I am part of another tradition (by the way, I had no idea that New Age was a religion in of itself, interesting) and how that tradition's views differ from Buddhism (in the process of course implying that I am not a Buddhist), it's best to understand that I am doing my best to approach the dilema in an honest and insightful manner. The story of the Siddhartha tells of rejection of established schools of living/seeking in the midst of a intensely strong personal commitment to discovering the truth about existence. So, that's what we are doing.

And...I do understand and agree with your thoughts and quote at the end.... but for me it is nothingness, not emptiness. Yes, I draw a distinction between the two. Nothingness and coming to understand it is a way of viewing the world as it exists before our eyes, whether you are looking at the Northern Lights or a piece of wood, it is a way to redefine our structure of meaning, placing emphasis on the present experience and allowing academic hypothesis to take a back seat. Emptiness I think is just that.... I haven't had a drink all day, so thirsty, oh look there's a water bottle... crap, it's empty. And we don't want to go too far down this road as we will end up in semantic village, but hopefully I've made my point.

I think it is interesting and ultimately good that everyone here has a strong and distinct personality with pretty clear views on what's happening, after all if we didn't have significant internal energy we wouldn't be here in the first place, but it is also important to find fellowship and common ground and ways to actually remove ceilings for one another so we can collectively reach new places.

Tanmart22 wrote:While it is impossible to divorce the seeker from his life experience entirely, much of the information I conveyed in both my original and follow up posts does not come from any assumption or school of thought. It comes directly from me observing my physical, neurological, and spiritual states, monitoring the activity of my mind and the beat of my heart, trying to draw connections without really relying on any established academic or philosophical doctrine.

Perhaps no conscious association with a particular academic or philosophical doctrine, but such thinking is part of our experience of life, and it apt to get mixed into our observations about our "self" without our awareness. In any event, you may find that, if you want to pursue "methods" of meditation that are derived more strictly from Buddhist philosophy and doctrine, you may need to abandon some of your conclusions drawn from previous meditation.

Or, perhaps, some of the miscommunication in this thread derives from the assumption that you are, indeed, asking for advice from the more traditional 'Buddhist' meditation methods?

Just trying to understand your postings and the questions you are (or are not) asking.

If they can sever like and dislike, along with greed, anger, and delusion, regardless of their difference in nature, they will all accomplish the Buddha Path.. ~ Sutra of Complete Enlightenment

Tanmart22 wrote:I would point out, however, that you, along with others who've replied here are under the impression that I am making a lot of assumptions and coming from a certain school of thought and brining teachings to the table, etc...

While it is impossible to divorce the seeker from his life experience entirely, much of the information I conveyed in both my original and follow up posts does not come from any assumption or school of thought. It comes directly from me observing my physical, neurological, and spiritual states, monitoring the activity of my mind and the beat of my heart, trying to draw connections without really relying on any established academic or philosophical doctrine.

Yes, that's where I was unsure. I noticed that I hadn't already heard a lot of what you wrote elsewhere, and guessed it might be original. Kudos to both of us if you like, in fact - I'm still the same

Tanmart22 wrote:I had no idea that New Age was a religion in of itself, interesting

It isn't really - That's just my assertion. Young religions tend to be just as diverse as that movement still appears (even from a distance) to be. It's closely linked, though, with the religion of Theosophy, founded in 1875 by H. P. Blavatsky.

Tanmart22 wrote:in the process of course implying that I am not a Buddhist

I couldn't tell, tbh. I noticed, though, that none of what you wrote was opposed (rather than only tangentially relevant) to the major Buddhist teachings, and -for all I know- might be in line with some 'apocryphal' ones such as those found in the Abhidharma. Practitioners are always advised to practice in ways that work for themselves as individuals; the advice you've received about finding a teacher relates to the fact that you're trying to hone practices by your lonesome and have started this thread -presumably- because you suspect that you could benefit from second opinions / outside perspectives. Buddhist teachers also function to (hopefully) bring a 'benefit of hindsight' as to whereabouts you are in your practice -'horizontally' as well as 'vertically'-, thereby to best judge what advice will likely work out best for you in the long run. Avoiding unforeseen threats to your mental and physical life -such as this one:-

catmoon wrote:I should probably mention that the heartbeat is not one of them [classical objects of meditation], basically because you can initiate a heart attack if you dont know what you are doing quite well.[/i]

is obviously a major role. {I understand pranayama yoga -normally a Hindu practice but not exclusively so- is a good example of a 'dangerous practice', which if done incorrectly can lead to psychosis and worse; Vajrayana practice is reserved for those sufficiently prepared -by both recent practice and the effects of past-life karma- for similar reasons which become clear with a little reading.}

Last edited by undefineable on Sat Sep 29, 2012 4:04 pm, edited 3 times in total.

"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}

Tanmart22 wrote:Nothingness and coming to understand it is a way of viewing the world as it exists before our eyes, whether you are looking at the Northern Lights or a piece of wood, it is a way to redefine our structure of meaning, placing emphasis on the present experience and allowing academic hypothesis to take a back seat. Emptiness I think is just that.... I haven't had a drink all day, so thirsty, oh look there's a water bottle... crap, it's empty. And we don't want to go too far down this road as we will end up in semantic village, but hopefully I've made my point.

Well I'm interested in concepts, not the words that may or may not refer to them. I'm not sure what you mean about nothingness though - Is 'academic hypothesis' the 'nothingness' that takes a back seat to the anticipated 'thingy-ness' of your present experience of objects -which in the context of meditation will often be barely tangible-? {If so, it's worth bearing in mind that an academic hypothesis is a real event happening in the mind-brain, which can then be compared to present experience and used in other ways.} Or, are you trying to find a fuller sense of 'nothingness' that will unlock your present experience to meditation? Anyhow, sunyata does literally mean 'emptiness', but the connotations of the word in this context are more-or-less opposed to the ones you just gave it, and unconnected to the usual English-language connotations of the word. In Buddhism, the word 'nothingness' and its local equivalents are used mainly to refute incorrect interpretations of 'emptiness', such as 'therefore there is no life after death' or even 'therefore there really is literally nothing'.

Seriously though, trying to understand (unguided) or (inexpertly) teach sunyata is another 'Danger Zone', so I won't be doing the latter in this lifetime - It took me many years of often painful contemplation (which I only did 'cos I sensed I had nothing to lose) to get even the foggiest handle on it (and this has already left my practice lopsided as I'm only just beginning a regular seated meditation ).

Tanmart22 wrote:it is also important to find fellowship and common ground and ways to actually remove ceilings for one another so we can collectively reach new places

Buddhism's traditionally collectivist structure is necessarily limited -in its practical effects- by the reality that the journey involved is by nature a solitary one, and hopefully no-one here is going to dare you to jump off a cliff before you've had the chance to hire abseiling gear . However, I think most debates here have common ground as their goal (although -inspite of my autism- I've yet to be won over by the 21'st-century notion that you can have fellowship without in-person contact) - This forum's predecessor, e-sangha, was so-named for a good reason. On the other hand, it's been hinted elsewhere on Dharmawheel (I think) that such 'pretty clear views on what's happening' might suggest limited spiritual progress (on the part of all participants) to a traditional Buddhist teacher (c.f. Nagarjuna on 'all views'). {As an aside, it's interesting how original views are viewed in society as more suspect than learned ones }

Last edited by undefineable on Sat Sep 29, 2012 4:08 pm, edited 4 times in total.

"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}

Yes I guess I should apologize to everyone here- this is my first attempt at creating a topic and clearly some of my gaps in understanding Buddhism and interacting with a more developed community are prohibiting me from evoking the type of responses I'm looking for.

I'll use this as a learning experience and will try to make my next topic more relevant and generally useful.

In Buddhism, Heart and Mind and Being are very much part of the same experience.

In creating the right question, you will find the right answer emerges- it is always in the question.That is what we have to arrive at a place of stillness independent of questions, answers and responses

Your third post: using a lot of emoticons to cover up the following statements:"You suffer from wooly thinking.""You want easy answers.""You have primitive insights that require confirmation.""You are not motivated enough to walk the Buddhist path.""You make a fuss when people don't accept your dreams."etc....

Your most recent post: It's your fault for not asking the right questions.

Consider this: a seeker and potential Buddhist joins an internet forum and makes a 'testing the waters' post that is theoretically open ended and could elicit basically any response from anyone with any background.

Tanmart22 wrote:Yes I guess I should apologize to everyone here- this is my first attempt at creating a topic and clearly some of my gaps in understanding Buddhism and interacting with a more developed community are prohibiting me from evoking the type of responses I'm looking for.

Y apologise? I don't c anything 'wrong' in your posts.

As for your description of the Dharmawheel 'community', I feel (to paraphrase Groucho Marx) a club that accepts me as a member to be many wonderful things, but 'more developed' is not one of them .

I'm aware of the intellectual cliche 'there are no wrong answers, only wrong questions', but I disagree - There are no wrong questions, only questions that can only be answered tangentially, questions best addressed to a particular audience, and questions that could be worded more precisely, for example:

Tanmart22 wrote:a seeker and potential Buddhist joins an internet forum and makes a 'testing the waters' post that is theoretically open ended and could elicit basically any response from anyone with any background.

- The problem here is that most who read an 'open-ended' message in an idiom that isn't familiar to them won't be so presumptive as to assume they know what the writer means down to the last detail, hence your responses here. In the absence of non-verbal input, it seems (to me) there are no definitive meanings to be interpreted 'between the lines' of written communication unless you know something about the person addressing you - Look at my last post . {As a further example, I didn't see anything in the post of Lobster's you were addressing that implied this:

Tanmart22 wrote:"You are not motivated enough to walk the Buddhist path."

In case that is what he meant, it's worth knowing that being motivated to the extreme of obsession is counter-productive on the Buddhist path.}

"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}

After 2 pages of pure nonsense I feel obliged to offer an answer to myself.

Tanmart22 wrote:Greetings all- this is my first topic here, and I hope I'm not being overly redundant or boring... feel free to redirect me if necessary.

So... the more I learn about Buddhism, and the more I put myself in the radius of the teachings, I realize that many of the Buddhist values are universal, and can be approached and understood by seekers everywhere, through intuition, wisdom, compassion, and a relentless pursuit of the truth.

The essence of the tradition, as evidenced by the life of the Buddha, is a rejection of false (established) practices, and putting the pursuit of truth above all else. The Buddha succeeded because he was able to break through the lies of the world.

This being said, I think the establishment and dissemination of the Buddha's teachings and the tradition of compassion and introspection that the Buddha's success has fostered is a jewel of humanity, and a beacon of light for seekers everywhere.

I feel like a big part of this tradition is bringing the rhythm of the heart and the panorama of the mind into synchrony.

This is where the practice of meditation becomes a useful tool, in calming the heart, clearing the mind, and introducing them to one another, almost for the first time.

My dilema (and potentially that of others) is that much of this synchrony depends on interest and support.

If I am doing something that I find to be truly interesting, or in an environment where I feel comfortable, wanted, needed, and accepted, my heart rate stabilizes and my mind lights up.

The problem is that I don't have control over this. So in a typical meditation situation, where I am sitting in a quiet room, focusing on the breath and trying to clear the mind, none of these positive mechanics are at work.

And the question arises, why should they be? I mean, you aren't doing anything, you're just sitting there, that's really nothing to feel good about. Don't get me wrong, I don't totally agree with this, but on a sub-conscious level, this is my tendency, I am realistic about this situation, and so it is decidedly uninspiring and uneventful.

Maybe that is the point... to immerse oneself in the mundane, and in that moment of focus, to see the magical.

Essentially, I think this is a key point of Buddhism. To be able to stabilize your heart and engage your mind, even when the environment is not terribly interesting or supportive. But I am having some trouble doing this.

So, help a new guy out.

Thanks.

Greetings- and welcome to Dharma Wheel. We're glad you found your way here!

The sentiments you express are indeed universal. People from all places and times have understood that to be engaged, they must plug in to a part of the world that excites them, that they can understand and contribute to, that they can relate to and derive meaning from. While this is generally a healthy practice that creates a vibrant and full planet, the individual can often experience waves of instability as a result from the contrast between the engaged and non-engaged states. I think this is the crux of your query, and is a hurdle that many face but few can clear.

The Buddhist tradition supports meditation as a way to steady and enter the mind, to know it with greater intimacy and clarity, to reduce the distance between the self and the mind, and to guide the self to important areas in the mind that may otherwise be hidden. Through this process we can learn more about what has excited the mind in the first place, why and how the mind responds in positive ways, and how repeated positive responses strengthen new pathways that create a stronger self.

Sit- and focus on something that has brought you joy recently. It can be an activity, an image, or an interpersonal experience... any positive coloration will do. Without grasping or tugging, let that color know that you are receptive to it, that it can enter; leave the door open, and the light on. Persist, through dedication, and start to notice your thoughts less, and your patterns or manner of thinking more. When your mind is positively engaged, how does it behave differently. Remain receptive as you, in broad terms, understand this manner of thinking enough to where it won't fly away. Sit with it, and let it teach you about yourself. Your emotional experience will let you know you are on the right track. At this deep stage of the process, gently shift the focus from your mind to your heart. You are building a bridge, through compassion.

I would encourage all members to know that Buddhists are generally known for their kindness and knowledge, and are helpful, especially when called upon. There are names for folks who inflate their own false sense of wisdom, but Buddhist is not one of them. After you type a post, read it, and ask "Am I helping?" "Am I answering questions, or simply patting myself on the back for some wisdom that excludes the option of a practical response?"

Tanmart, - The 'niche' nature of Dharmawheel's appeal -among Buddhist forums- has been 'flagged' before. Here, traditionalist Buddhist teachers are liable see 'folks who inflate their own false sense of wisdom' (I think I know where you're driving there) and -perhaps- pretty much write 'us' off as Buddhists consequentially.

Nonetheless, your 'response to self' is non-Buddhist throughout (except in your insightful paragraph on Buddhist meditation), and contradicts the 'three seals' of Buddhism (no satisfaction outside nirvana, no permanence, and no identity). I dare say, though, that the practices (original again?) you then described may well be helpful to you in some way, and if you're really 'nailing you colours to the mast' here, it looks as if you'll have to find your own path for a while. Don't get me wrong - I'm sure more than two of us know (simply through a shared western culture, perhaps) what you mean about 'engaged'/'non-engaged' and 'distance between the self and the mind' without necessarily even being sure (yet) as to how we deal or dealt with it.

Don't give up At the same time, I see little benefit in wondering what to label a spiritual path that is so finely-crafted to your own needs that so many have failed to understand the meaning of your words. I confidently predict that NO-ONE HERE, including myself, could understand all the intricacies of my own spiritual path from day 1; the main difference is simply in the places I've wound up at to date, and -believe me- they're none of them any better than where you're at in ANY sense.

I'm still a thinker first and a Buddhist second, so PM me if you wish (and yes, I'm fully prepared for any PM to be more insulting than can be imagined ) _ I confess the questions I try to answer here are nearly always my own, rather than anyone else's, but then many open forums come across to me as a series of intellectual monologues / personal perspectives with little room for helpful answers. Some other members, though, know of other Buddhist (and broadly spiritual) forums that have a more conversational culture that I've observed.

"Removing the barrier between this and that is the only solution" {Chogyam Trungpa - "The Lion's Roar"}

In Buddhism the heart and mind are identical, and have nothing whatsoever to do with the heart organ, or indeed the brain. The heart/mind can move anywhere around the body, but its most common home is in the centre of the chest, the heart chakra. As for Buddhist practice, as you noted, it is about Wisdom and Compassion, which is to say Meditation and Love. 'Relative Bodhicitta is essentially compassion, Ultimate Bodhicitta is essentially insight.' [Jamgon Kongtrul] Both are essential, but of the two love is more important. 'We can summarize the Four Boundless Qualities in the single phrase 'a kind heart', just train yourself to have a kind heart always in all situations.' [Patrul] R.

And so you have mindfully arrived at that spot in the path where it is now time to observe what makes your heart...open...and what makes your heart...close...and mindfully observe what happens to you and your world when your heartopensand mindfully observe what happens to you and your world when your heartcloses.

It is the open heart that sees heaven through the depths of hell of a thousand lifetimesit is the open heart that eventually sees and knows nirvana.Om mani padme hum